North Country officials weigh in on prayers at public meetings following Supreme Court debate

At a recent meeting of the Jefferson County Board of Legislators, legislator Barry M. Ormsby, R-Belleville, stood in front of colleagues, department heads and employees and offered a brief prayer.

But next summer, Mr. Ormsbys actions may be considered illegal.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week heard oral arguments in the first case to take up the issue of prayer before public meetings since 1983, when the Court ruled in Marsh v. Chambers that prayers before the Nebraska Legislature were not unconstitutional.

To invoke divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, a violation of the Establishment Clause; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgement of beliefs widely held among the people of this country, a summary of the Courts decision reads.

But in this new case, Town of Greece, New York, v. Susan Galloway, et al., a Jewish woman, Susan Galloway, claims that prayers said before town meetings were overtly Christian, did not allow for other viewpoints and made her feel alienated from her government. She and an atheist who is not named in the case sued the town to stop the practice.

The town defended the prayers, which began in 1999 under Supervisor John Auberger. Before that, council members observed a moment of silence, according to news reports.

A federal appeals court ruled that the practice violated the constitution. The town and its attorneys is seeking a reversal of that decision.

The Supreme Courts ruling could have broad implications and if the decision of the court of appeals is upheld, it would almost certainly mean that prayers like the one Mr. Ormsby offered Tuesday night would be outlawed.

But regardless of what the high courts decision may be, north country government bodies appear ready to flout its determination, citing the importance of faith and prayer in their lives and in the decisions of the municipal organizations they represent.

In St. Lawrence and Lewis counties, lawmakers defend their traditions and in some cases, insist that they will continue to pray at meetings no matter what decision is reached by the Supreme Court.

A prayer before St. Lawrence County Board of Legislatorss meeting is a tradition that goes back beyond recent memory.

I think asking for divine guidance before a meeting is a good thing, said Legislator Vernon D. Sam Burns, who offers the prayer. No one has told me I have offended them. I try to be careful in what I say and what I ask for.

Mr. Burns, a Catholic, does not make his prayer Christian but asks for help from the almighty God.

My dad was a legislator and he told me before they had prayers, Mr. Burns said. I dont know if they rotated it or not.

When Mr. Burns took office, the prayer was offered by Thomas A. Nichols, who at the time was a lay minister and is now a Methodist minister. He and Mr. Burns took turns giving the prayer until Mr. Nichols left the board. Mr. Burns took over, although he would be willing to share.

Mr. Burns tailors his prayers to events of the day. Some of his invocations have asked for help for veterans, the St. Lawrence Psychiatric Center, and issues legislators are debating.

The prayers are not standard prayers. He touches on issues that are relevant to the people in the room, Administrator Karen M. St. Hilaire said. It is never harmful to reflect and think about making better decisions.

Prayers before legislative meetings in Lewis County have been ongoing since Ive been here and before, said Teresa K. Clark, clerk of the board.

She will soon mark 34 years with the county.

Legislator Philip C. Hathway, R-Harrisville has been leading the countys monthly meeting with an invocation.

He took the role from Legislator Michael A. Tabolt, R-Croghan, when Mr. Tabolt was named board chairman.

While he doesnt plan what to say in advance, his prayer doesnt vary that much. I usually ask for healing for the people in need and guidance in the decisions before the board, he said.

Occasionally, he said, Ill ask for patience and understanding.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on the case in June.

Commenting rules:

Stick to the topic of the article/letter/editorial.

When responding to issues raised by other commenters, do not engage in personal attacks or name-calling.

Comments that include profanity/obscenities or are libelous in nature will be removed without warning.

Violators' commenting privileges may be revoked indefinitely. By commenting you agree to our full Terms of Use.